AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Moderate 54 Bitcoin

Handle implicit splice_locked during channel_reestablish

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by Jeffrey Czyz

73/100 · Adequate
Handle implicit splice_locked during channel_reestablish

When handling a counterparties channel_reestablish, the spec dictates
that a splice_locked may be implied by my_current_funding_locked.
Compare that against any pending splices and handle an implicit
splice_locked message when applicable.
✓ Specific, descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Provides detailed explanatory context
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit fixes a protocol-handling bug in LDK's Lightning splicing feature. When two peers reconnect after a splice, the Lightning spec says a 'splice_locked' message can be implied by the other peer's current funding state. LDK previously did not recognize this implied signal, which could leave a splice stuck or cause the channel to behave incorrectly after reconnection. The change detects the implicit splice_locked and processes it normally.

Recommended action

Review splicing reestablishment test coverage to ensure implicit splice_locked cases are exercised. If running a node with splicing enabled, update to include this fix to avoid splice stalls or incorrect channel state after reconnections.

Security signals we found

01

Protocol state machine fix for splicing reestablishment

02

Implicit message inference now handled per spec

03

Potential channel stall or desynchronization if splice_locked not inferred

04

Feature-gated behind splicing compile-time flag

Risk score

Why this scored 54/100

Our methodology →
Potential impact 18/30
Exploitability 10/25
Stealth signal 8/15
Affected reach 7/15
Confidence 7/10
Evidence quality 4/5
Human-validated context

Community notes

Notes can correct, qualify, or add evidence to the AI analysis. Every note shown here has been validated by a human moderator.

No validated notes yet.

The AI analysis stands alone for now. Submit a note if you can add evidence or important context.